I C D a Two 30 Is a Broader Shield Than the 19 59 Case.

The court also wrote that section two 30, and i quote, creates a federal immunity to any cause of action. That ends up being a stricter protection for a distributor than the 19 59 case. You can make an argument that if there'd never been a c t a, there never would have been a need for a section two 30. But this 19 97 case, arin versus a o l, sets the protection for iner net services higher than the protection that was set for a distributor in 19 59. The new broader shield became the principal justification for c d a two 30.